More civilian technology companies are entering defence-adjacent markets in 2026 than at any point in the last twenty years. Most are underestimating what the shift requires.
Moving a civilian tech company into defence-adjacent work is a significant operating-model shift — and the companies treating it as a sales motion expansion are systematically underperforming the companies treating it as an operating transformation.
The instinct in civilian tech is to treat defence as a market expansion: hire a defence-experienced salesperson, attend the relevant trade shows, adapt the product slightly, win the first contract. The first contract often happens. The second and third do not, because the operating model around the contract is not built for defence-grade delivery.
Three specific gaps appear. Security and clearance — both for personnel and for systems — is more demanding than civilian tech infrastructure typically provides. Programme management — defence customers expect a different cadence and rigor than civilian software customers. Stakeholder management — defence procurement involves more stakeholders, longer timelines, and more formality than civilian sales motions.
Companies that succeed in defence-adjacent expansion make three operating-model shifts. First, a dedicated defence operating unit — not a defence sales team, but an operating unit with its own clearance posture, programme management discipline, and cultural fit with defence customers. Second, senior leadership with real defence credibility — typically through hire of a senior operator with prior defence delivery experience, often initially as interim before permanent.
Third, an operating cadence that matches defence customer rhythms — quarterly reviews, formal programme reporting, the discipline of working with structured customer organisations. None of these is cheap. All of them are necessary for the second and third defence contract.
For civilian tech CEOs considering defence-adjacent expansion, three questions matter. First, is the company prepared to invest in a parallel operating model for defence, or is it expecting to extend the existing one? The honest answer to that question determines whether the move is feasible.
Second, who is the senior operating leader for the defence unit — and is that hire prioritised correctly relative to product and engineering investment? Third, is the board prepared for a three-to-five-year horizon to material defence revenue? Companies that answer these three honestly typically succeed. Companies that underestimate all three typically do not.
This is the kind of problem we work on. If you are leading a defence market expansion that has not yet been matched by operating-model investment, the team at Grant & Graham would be pleased to talk. We provide operating-model design and senior interim leadership across defence and dual-use tech to civilian tech CEOs and boards considering defence-adjacent expansion. Contact us.